As if the tariff situation wasn’t confusing enough, the picture has been further scrambled by Wednesday’s court ruling that President Trump lacked the authority to impose most of the current and planned import duties he’s set. 

 

 

The White House is racing to keep the controversial surcharges in place despite the considerable backlash they’ve triggered. It has already convinced a U.S. Court of Appeals to issue a temporary delay on overturning the tariffs. Administration officials have indicated they’ll seek to have Wednesday’s decision overturned on a permanent basis via an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. 

 

The turn-of-events over about a 12-hour period is the latest complication in what’s been a decidedly fluid and vexing situation for the food-away-from-home industry, if not the whole U.S. economy. 

 

Because the president has vacillated on precisely how much he intends to tax imports, and when those duties might be imposed, consumers and businesses have no idea what they’ll be paying by late summer for goods ranging from furniture to cocoa.  

 

The uncertainty has led to an economic slowdown that brought a 0.2% decline in the Gross National Product (GNP) for the first quarter of 2025. Corporate profits for the period fell by $118.1 billion, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce, with economists citing turmoil from the tariffs as the key reason.  

 

The situation is expected to grow even murkier as the result of Wednesday’s decision by the little-known and even lesser understood U.S. Court of International Trade. The deliberative body ruled that President Trump lacked the authority under the emergency powers of his office to unilaterally set the tariffs, which begin at 10% for all countries and run as high as 30% for some imports from China. It directed the executive branch to stop collecting the duties after a 10-day period. 

 

Trump has said he intends to impose stiffer duties on imports from selected nations in July, but his administration has acknowledged that it hoped to negotiate less-daunting rates in the meantime, using the threat of severe duties as a prod. That plan was rendered doubtful by Wednesday’s ruling. 

 

The matter is expected ultimately to be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court. Getting there could take months, though the administration has raised the possibility of seeking “emergency relief” on an immediate basis. It sounded that possibility in asking the Court of Appeals for a delay in recognizing the customs court’s decision. 

 

The administration is widely expected by economists and politicos to explore other ways of putting Trump’s protectionist trade policy into place if the customs court’s decision should hold. But there was no consensus on what form a workaround might take. 

Simultaneously, the administration is challenging the court’s authority in the court of public opinion. The U.S. Department of Justice blasted the ruling as “rife with legal error” and a blatant overreach into the executive branch’s authority and responsibilities.  

 

White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt followed with a public accusation that the court “brazenly abused their judicial power.”  

 

The Court of International Trade is the body empowered by the U.S. Constitution to be the deciding authority on civil complaints relating to customers and international trade.  

 

Experts are still parsing the decision to determine its scope.  

 

Wednesday’s ruling applied only to the tariffs Trump imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a piece of legislation intended to give the U.S. chief executive extraordinary authority during times of crisis. Other of the tariffs currently in place were imposed under other legislation pertaining to national security.  

 

Those duties include surcharges on materials that rival what’s produced or processed in the U.S., such as steel, aluminum and automobiles. Many of those tariffs were imposed during Trump’s first administration or the tenure of President Biden. 

 

“This is a mess of epic proportions,” commented Phil Kafarakis, president and CEO of IFMA The Food Away from Home Association.

 

“There already was a glaring lack of clarity on how large the tariffs might be or when they’d actually be imposed. Now we’re back to the question of will most of them even be levied at all. And that’s as the companies that feed America are starting to plan their budgets for 2026. A school district or college dining hall won’t know what they’ll be paying for their staples.” 

 

The organization represents the whole food-away-from-home universe, from restaurants to convenience stores to the patient-feeding operations of hospitals, along with the manufacturers who supply them.  

 

The association is planning a series of monthly webinars to help members contend with the tariff situation and another of the Trump Administration’s signature policies, its Make America Healthy Again initiative. The inaugural installment is planned for June 19.  

 

Interested parties are encouraged to watch IFMAworld.com for details.  Download the IFMA The Food Away from Home Association app to keep abreast of the latest on tariffs as the situation evolves.

As Managing Editor for IFMA The Food Away from Home Association, Romeo is responsible for generating the group's news and feature content. He brings more than 40 years of experience in covering restaurants to the position.